Of course, the UBU approach described here is at best questionable. But the UBU shit list treatment goes further, to being corrupt and mean spirited.

There are no explanations, no appeals---only (it appears) Kenneth Goldsmaith (who?) spewing, when he isn't "appropriating."

The soundtrack, and soundtrack ONLY, for my film "The Flicker," turned up on this site, and I had already discussed and rejected the dissociating of sound and image in this
work with Lee Renaldo and others, in reference to their proposals to use the visual part of "The Flicker" in live music performance. I had also rejected a Table of the Elements
offer to release the track as a CD. I felt that (1) the sound and image were conceptually integral (in ways I won't go into here), (2) the film had been adopted as iconic in
reference to the category of "structural" film, and should retain its integriy within that guise, and (3) questions of quality and my own artistic prerogatives prevented me from
approving this rudely uninvited appropriation.

In actuality, I personally have a great deal of sympathy for and interest in the free dissemination of video and film works. For instance, I am the principal contributor to a
project of the European Union called "Oasis", based at ZKM in Karlsruhe, which seeks eventually to provide study copies of works online. And (prior to this contretemps with
UBU) I would have hoped eventually to release all of my work this way, or in some other readily transmissable form. There's also the tsunami of YouTube just off shore! But
there needs to be a certain gentlepersonly code of conduct that can circulate within such efforts, to replace the failing system of intellectual property law. UBU, in this
respect, is a disgrace to the field, and not least so in its (not really) laughable "hall of shame."

Of course, "ubu" is as "ubu" does; Jarry may have spewed crap, but he did not attempt character assassination, even tho he carried a rifle around with him.

-------t0ny

On Sat Jun 7 4:22 , "Beverly O'Neill" <email suppressed> sent:

>
>....The UBU problem... so complicated since Kenneth Goldsmith who runs the site doesn't ask artists for permission to show their work. He simply uploads it and waits to
see if an official request gets made to remove the film from the site. UBU streams a significant number of pieces this way, without any approval. Unfortunately on many
college campuses budget reductions have forced faculty to cut back on film rentals from the co-ops, (Canyon, N.Y. Filmmakers, et. al.) so that many are using UBU in lieu of
showing the real thing. The co-ops annual budgets are undercut by the over-use and dependence upon UBU. Filmmakers have a 50% share arrangement with the co-ops
and that's in jeopardy since UBU feels entitled to take pieces, some of them lengthy, expensively made, famous, without providing any compensation. When Kubelka asked
UBU to remove Unsere Afrikareisse Goldsmith placed him in the site's hall of shame, along with Bruce Conner, Tony Conrad, Oscar Fischinger, and Jordan Belson among
others who not only didn't want their copyright enfringed band the co-ops to suffer as well.Any insights about the workings of UBU would be very much appreciated.